The introduction of the third edition of the Roman Missal and the new translations of the liturgical texts offer the entire English-speaking Church an opportunity to correct some bad liturgical habits that have developed over the past four decades.

The point of these corrections is neither liturgical prissiness nor aesthetic nostalgia; there is no “reform of the reform” to be found in lace surplices, narrow fiddleback chasubles and massive candles.

The point of correcting bad habits is to celebrate the Novus Ordo of Paul VI with dignity and beauty, so that holy Mass is experienced for what it is: our participation in the liturgy of saints and angels in heaven — where, I am quite confident, they don’t sing treacly confections like Gather Us In.

Celebrants (not “presiders”): If you’ve fallen into the bad habit of concluding Mass by some variant of “May almighty God bless us all, Father, Son and Holy Spirit,” please cease and desist. You were not ordained to the ministry of Word and sacrament to invoke, generically, the divine blessing, which anyone can (and should) do before and after meals; you were given the power to confer the divine blessing by being configured to Christ in holy orders.

Catholics who embrace the truth of Catholic faith do not enjoy clericalism. But they do not find comfort, much less evangelical leadership, from priests who imagine they can avoid clericalism by unwittingly denying the truth of their own sacramental vocation and its distinctiveness.

Extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist: The same admonition applies to you, but in a different way — you must not offer a “blessing,” in any form, to pre-first-Communion children who join their parents in the Communion procession.

Eucharistic ministers are not junior-grade clergy or petty officers; no one outside of those in holy orders should “bless” in a liturgical context. Again, this is not a matter of prissiness, and still less one of clericalism; it is a matter of doctrinal and theological precision — which, if lost, can damage the celebration of the sacred liturgy.

Extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist are vastly overused in U.S. parishes, a practice that risks of signaling that the Mass is a matter of the self-worshipping community celebrating and feeding itself. But the problem of the ordinary use of what is supposed, after all, to be “extraordinary” can be addressed another time.

For now, pastors must make it clear that no one blesses children during the Communion procession except bishops, priests and deacons, i.e., those in holy orders.

Music directors and pastors: As a general rule, sing all the verses of a processional or recessional hymn.

Good hymns have a textual integrity that is lost when we sing hymn excerpts rather than hymns. It doesn’t take that much more time to sing all six verses of For All the Saints or all four verses of Crown Him With Many Crowns; cutting such great texts by two-thirds or one-half inevitably sends the signal that music in the liturgy is filler — and there is no room for filler in the sacred liturgy.

The Congregation: Sacred space is different from other space; the inside of the church is different from the narthex (not “gathering space”).

Thus we should all break the bad habit of commencing the post-Mass conversation immediately after the conclusion of the recessional hymn or organ postlude. Wait until you leave the interior of the church before beginning to chat with the neighbors.

If there is a choral postlude, chatting over it is an insult to the choir, which has worked hard to prepare something beautiful for God; if there is only an organ postlude (with or without a recessional hymn), chatting over it is an insult to the organist. Thirty seconds of silence after Mass is no bad thing.

And while we’re on the subject of the congregation, might we all reconsider our vesture at Sunday Mass?

Dressing in one’s “Sunday best” was not an affectation; it was an acknowledgment of our baptismal dignity.

Let’s reclaim that dignity and its expression in our “Sunday best.”

George Weigel is distinguished senior fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.

Weigel’s column is distributed by the Denver Catholic Register, the official newspaper of the Archdiocese of Denver.

A friend you choose by working with brings is purchased from one. d22.fr http://d22.fr/

Posted by Maryanne on Thursday, May, 3, 2012 8:18 PM (EDT):

Leslie,
Because the “Communion Line” is only for those who are going to receive the Eucharist. This was explained very well by a priest. At the end of Mass, everyone gets a blessing, including those who did not receive the Eucharist. So it would be silly to have those not able to receive the Eucharist go up to receive a blessing. In essence, you can have the entire Church going up, some to receive the Eucharist and some to get blessings.

And as I said, everyone, including those who did not receive the Eucharist, get a blessing at the end of the Mass.

The real issue is not children and why a Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist can’t bless them, but that Communion time is not a time for a blessing.

God bless,
Maryanne

Posted by Seriously on Thursday, May, 3, 2012 5:37 PM (EDT):

Elizabeth,

Anonymously might work as well, or even pose it as a question. Like, “I was told that we are not really supposed to be holing hands during the Lord’s prayer is that true.”, I would send it to both the Bishop and the Preist.

For the rest of you; If you whisper in someones ear a story and they whisper it in someone elses ear and so on down the line a hundred years, what would that story sound like today. Food for though innocent, probably, just plain wrong, very much so…...

This article was, I think, the authors intention to start a conversation not to be an end all be all to everything. A beginning if you will….

Keep on posting people come up with the ideas that make and change our world/church for the better. It really is our work/fight to keep our God and our Church pure and respectful. Don’t hide with your head in the sand. Stand up and ask for what is yours.

Prayer is also another answer for those of us who are not strong. St Michael had to fight the enemy to remove them from heaven so also is it our duty to read and be apart of the Bible teachings.

Enough of my rantings I am just too tired of people letting themselves be rolled over on because they think it is the Christian thing to do. It is not. Look at the three guys that were given talents and the boss came back from his trip and he beat the guy who buried his talent in the ground. What does that say. It says that you should at least try to do something with what you are given. Matthew 25:25-30ish….

Posted by Leslie on Thursday, May, 3, 2012 3:58 PM (EDT):

If laypeople can baptized in an emergency, why can they not bless a child in the communion line. Simply laying their hand on the child’s head and saying “God bless you” is innocent enough.

Excellent article Mr. Weigel, but please use the appropriate language: extraordinary minister of Holy Communion. It is difficult to train our parishioners that the term Eucharistic minister or even extraordinary minister of the Eucharist does not describe what they do.
Thanks for all your good work.
In Christ,
Dcn Ken

Posted by Elizabeth on Monday, Jan, 23, 2012 3:44 AM (EDT):

As a new catholic, how could I possibly send a “letter of correction” to my pastor about hand holding during the Our Father and the assisting pastor who sits while the eucharistic ministers distribute our Lord. These abuses need to be policed from the Bishop down. I agree that people want a Holy Mass. I am so thankful to be a catholic now, I don’t understand why there is any question that the GIRM should be followed exactly.
I believe the NO or Latin Mass can be good. I pray our Bishops will lead in stopping abuse of the Mass.

Posted by Nanner on Sunday, Jan, 22, 2012 10:36 PM (EDT):

Disclosure: I am not Catholic, but a reformed evangelical. Can I just comment, that not one item in this article was defended by scripture. Not even a whisper or intimation of it. Everything is mere opinion and commentary. It tells me that the focus is on the wrong goal, and the productive energies that go into such thoughts and disagreements should instead be directed at something, well, productive.

Posted by Patrick Von Dohlen on Friday, Jan, 20, 2012 8:40 PM (EDT):

George, very good comments. I wish you would have addressed holding hands during the Our Father and that all Altar Servers should be male. Sincerely, Patrick

Posted by Seriously on Friday, Jan, 20, 2012 6:19 PM (EDT):

MamaBenedikt,

a) Rebellious child and b) do your homework I have and know this to be true I can produce the other information besides what is to follow, if you would like. The article is from The Atlanta Journal and on the UPI wire from the Vatican itself and it states that “there was never a change in the Catholic rule that women cover their head in Church” also look up 1 Corinthians 11:1-17 I have more information out of Canon Code but this should be enough for you. Additionally, I stated a Mandilla you may as well adorn a pretty hat. Just needs to be a head covering of some kind.

And “Al” Keep your head up, do your homework, and never give up, this is a political thing as well, remember that Satan will try to infiltrate the church as well simply and innocently as was done with the women’s head covering. Keep on fighting for what is right and just no matter what the cost because God is definitely worth it.

Posted by Al on Thursday, Jan, 19, 2012 11:57 PM (EDT):

Your article touches a most frustrating and sad topic for me. At middle-age, left a lucrative career to attend a mainline Protestant-affiliated college. While in the past it had a devoted, proud religious heritage, like other, similar ones, that had dimmed into the past. After receiving my degree, I attended a seminary of this same denomination.
Some of what took place there can only be described as “scandalous,” but, nevertheless, I persevered. Having graduated and ordained a minister, my education in the state of the denomination continued. There were the “bad liturgical habits,”the indifference to the “traditions” of not only the denomination, but Christianity in general, and a general sense of secularism. Eventually, I left the denomination. In my early 60’s, I was Confirmed and received First Holy Communion. Today, I look upon that as a major mistake. I went “from the frying pan into the fire”! Having gone to Mass at four different parishes, I am well acquainted with the habits and abuses of which Mr. Weigel writes. How utterly, utterly sad this is. To be a stranger and step into some of these situations, for me, is quite disturbing and I find it works against a deeper catechesis in the faith. So, now, instead of belonging to a denomination of which I feel a part of, but one with which I have major disagreements; I am now part of the Church and have no major dogmatic or doctrinal disagreements, yet feel as though I am always the stranger. Given that I feel ever so weary in the path I have taken, I have little hope for much change. I would only hope that those who perpetuate their novelties would realize it is the Church’s worship, not theirs to do with as they please. Thank you for listening.

Posted by MamaBenedikt on Thursday, Jan, 19, 2012 10:18 PM (EDT):

Seriously?! Women are supposed to be wearing a mantilla of some sort?! No, we are not. I am a very conservative (if you wish to use that word) Catholic. More important here is doing as Rome does.

Posted by Rex on Tuesday, Jan, 17, 2012 6:16 PM (EDT):

It would be nice if we all prayed together in unity. When some people change the words to be gender neutral while others are praying the prescribed prayers it draws attention away from God and onto that particular agenda. Agendas can be promoted outside the liturgy. I know God is Spirit, not an old man with a long white beard. If you feel the need to tell me that please do it outside of mass. At mass let us pray TOGETHER.

Posted by Seriously on Tuesday, Jan, 17, 2012 2:52 PM (EDT):

The Pope has made some changes to the liturgy and mass for us to see that he is trying to make some of these “shadowy” changes for us. We should obey our Father and mind what is laid out for us. Instead of being the rebellious child that kicks and screams every time an object of sin is taken away from us.

Another missed item in the above article is that women are still supposed to be wearing a mandilla of some sort. This is one of the shadowy things that we forgot about. In 1969 an article was released that stated that women were still required to wear them (coming from Rome) to mass. Now if a small thing like that is very wrong and disobedient then everything in this mans article is disobedient and should therefore be considered a sin. We all need to make the change to our churches and follow our call and “love” one another not rattle the cages of the one that is pouring out the love. Do the actual research that is required for you to know the truth before pounding on one who feels the calling. Also print out your research and take it to your preist and if he does not hear the calling then take it to your bishop. Do the right thing people and get of your (-retentive) behinds and do the work that is requested of you from God himself. In other words a saying that kind of fits is you can’t complain if you don’t vote.

Posted by Michelle on Tuesday, Jan, 17, 2012 12:13 PM (EDT):

@Jacqueline

As I have stated in previous comments, how we worship does matter. The problem is that the laity is not properly catechized on the importance of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the respect that our sacred liturgy deserves. Blessed Pope John Paul II lamented about the shadows that have crept into the celebration of the Mass, stemming from both clergy and laity alike. This led to the promulgation of the document, “Redemptionis Sacramentum.”

One of the things that RS states is that:

[169.] Whenever an abuse is committed in the celebration of the sacred Liturgy, it is to be seen as a real falsification of Catholic Liturgy. Saint Thomas wrote, “the vice of falsehood is perpetrated by anyone who offers worship to God on behalf of the Church in a manner contrary to that which is established by the Church with divine authority, and to which the Church is accustomed”.278

[170.] In order that a remedy may be applied to such abuses, “there is a pressing need for the biblical and liturgical formation of the people of God, both pastors and faithful”,279 so that the Church’s faith and discipline concerning the sacred Liturgy may be accurately presented and understood. Where abuses persist, however, proceedings should be undertaken for safeguarding the spiritual patrimony and rights of the Church in accordance with the law, employing all legitimate means.

As I see it, those who seem to want to turn a blind eye to a lot of the bad that is going on might need some catechesis themselves.

With all due respect, your comments regarding the scribes and pharisees seem to be misapplied here. There is a great confusion among folks when they bring up these individuals. Jesus’ concern regarding the pharisees and the scribes stems from their misapplication of priestly practices upon the faithful of Ancient Israel. They were wanting the faithful to follow practices that were reserved solely to the priests. Furthermore, the pharisees really had nothing to do with the sacrificial cultic worship of Ancient Israel.

As far as parents encouraging their children to hold hands, this, too, is not proper. The truest expression of unity comes during the reception of Holy Communion, when the faithful, as they receive Our Lord, are in deep union with Christ and, by extension, with His Church. The hand-holding makes it more about us than about Christ. Furthermore, as such a posture is not even included in the norms and rubrics, we should not take it upon ourselves to invent and imbed things into the Mass that have no business being there.

As to your last observation, it does bother the Lord that abuses have crept into the Mass. Jesus gave the authority of binding and loosening to St. Peter and his Successors, the Pope. Both Blessed John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have seen fit to start correcting the abuses that have crept up over the course of the last 40 years. Peter has spoken with the authority given to him by Christ. We need to obey.

Posted by William Bruns on Tuesday, Jan, 17, 2012 12:04 PM (EDT):

A couple more:

Could priests please stop adding, “Good morning, everyone,” after the ritual greeting. We’ve already been greeted. Same with the “Have a great day,” following the last blessing.

At our parish this year and several times before, we sang only two verses of “We Three Kings” on Epiphany. Sort of like some of the story is missing. Same complaint with most hymns to the Trinity. Singing two of three verses. No wonder many folks feel as if they’ve never met the Holy Spirit!

Posted by The last man on Tuesday, Jan, 17, 2012 10:59 AM (EDT):

I wish a kind priest would tell the congregation that talking through the entire liturgy is bad form and annoying.

Posted by Jacqueline on Tuesday, Jan, 17, 2012 12:23 AM (EDT):

I have difficulty reading and understanding all these comments/opinions, including George Weigel’s article on ‘breaking bad liturgical habits.’ Why aren’t the Bishops in unison over these issues? Why were these so-called bad habits allowed to begin with? Shortage of priests? Misinterpretation? Loss of Catholics leaving the church? It thrills me to see my Catholic Parish grow with young families who bring their youngsters to mass and sit up front so these youngsters can observe the mass, participate in the saying of prayers, singing, holding of hands, and giving the sign of peace. Are these parents doing wrong? Remember the scribes and the pharisees? As I see it, the bishops need to get proper direction from their leaders, have meetings with their pastors who in turn should direct their parishioners as to what is to be. Right now I see too many opinions expressed which makaes everything get out of hand. Is Christ laughing at us or what?

Posted by Michelle on Monday, Jan, 16, 2012 4:43 PM (EDT):

@alcie, with all due respect, I think that both you and @mike are missing the whole point of the article.

Yes, how we worship does indeed matter. If you read in the Old Testament, God the Father was very specific in the manner in which he dictated to Moses just how He was to be worshipped. Form also mattered to Jesus. Remember, he threw out the moneychangers and the vendors because they were profaning the sacred space in the Temple reserved for the Gentiles to use for prayer.

Even in the Church, how we worship does matter indeed. Redemptionis Sacramentum states that:

[6.] For abuses “contribute to the obscuring of the Catholic faith and doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament”.14 Thus, they also hinder the faithful from “re-living in a certain way the experience of the two disciples of Emmaus: ‘and their eyes were opened, and they recognized Him’”.15 For in the presence of God’s power and divinity16 and the splendor of His goodness, made manifest especially in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, it is fitting that all the faithful should have and put into practice that power of acknowledging God’s majesty that they have received through the saving Passion of the Only-Begotten Son.17

[7.] Not infrequently, abuses are rooted in a false understanding of liberty. Yet God has not granted us in Christ an illusory liberty by which we may do what we wish, but a liberty by which we may do that which is fitting and right.18 This is true not only of precepts coming directly from God, but also of laws promulgated by the Church, with appropriate regard for the nature of each norm. For this reason, all should conform to the ordinances set forth by legitimate ecclesiastical authority.

===

Furthermore, the document goes on to say that:

[11.] The Mystery of the Eucharist “is too great for anyone to permit himself to treat it according to his own whim, so that its sacredness and its universal ordering would be obscured”.27 On the contrary, anyone who acts thus by giving free rein to his own inclinations, even if he is a Priest, injures the substantial unity of the Roman Rite, which ought to be vigorously preserved,28 and becomes responsible for actions that are in no way consistent with the hunger and thirst for the living God that is experienced by the people today. Nor do such actions serve authentic pastoral care or proper liturgical renewal; instead, they deprive Christ’s faithful of their patrimony and their heritage. For arbitrary actions are not conducive to true renewal,29 but are detrimental to the right of Christ’s faithful to a liturgical celebration that is an expression of the Church’s life in accordance with her tradition and discipline. In the end, they introduce elements of distortion and disharmony into the very celebration of the Eucharist, which is oriented in its own lofty way and by its very nature to signifying and wondrously bringing about the communion of divine life and the unity of the People of God.30 The result is uncertainty in matters of doctrine, perplexity and scandal on the part of the People of God, and, almost as a necessary consequence, vigorous opposition, all of which greatly confuse and sadden many of Christ’s faithful in this age of ours when Christian life is often particularly difficult on account of the inroads of “secularization” as well.31

[12.] On the contrary, it is the right of all of Christ’s faithful that the Liturgy, and in particular the celebration of Holy Mass, should truly be as the Church wishes, according to her stipulations as prescribed in the liturgical books and in the other laws and norms. Likewise, the Catholic people have the right that the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass should be celebrated for them in an integral manner, according to the entire doctrine of the Church’s Magisterium. Finally, it is the Catholic community’s right that the celebration of the Most Holy Eucharist should be carried out for it in such a manner that it truly stands out as a sacrament of unity, to the exclusion of all blemishes and actions that might engender divisions and factions in the Church.32

Even Pope Benedict XVI, as the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, lamented on the current state of liturgical affairs. In 2005, he wrote this as part of the meditation on the Ninth Station.

“How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even realizing that he is there! How often is his Word twisted and misused! What little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words! How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to him! How much pride, how much self-complacency!”

Bad liturgies wound Christ and they also hurt the Church. If we can’t see that, then there is a serious problem here.

Posted by Mike on Monday, Jan, 16, 2012 4:30 PM (EDT):

@alcie- AMEN!

Posted by alcie on Monday, Jan, 16, 2012 4:28 PM (EDT):

Jesus, I love you. I love the Holy Eucharist. I love singing in the choir. I love my fellow parishioners. I know that you are offended when they spend more time arguing about the Mass, the priest, and the music than worshipping You. Please pardon us all.

Posted by Joseph Brown on Saturday, Jan, 14, 2012 3:35 AM (EDT):

@Dan: Please do.

Posted by Heather on Friday, Jan, 13, 2012 3:51 PM (EDT):

@ Irene - Jesus and the apostles sang hymns. Are we not supposed to do as they did? There is the music of the angels in Heaven, as many Saints and mystics have told us. Even the book of Revelation 5:9, tells us “And they sung a new canticle, saying: ‘Thou art worthy, O Lord, to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; because thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God, in thy blood, out of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation’” (Douay Rheims Translation). So, if we are to be in worship as it is in Heaven, then there should be music. He who sings prays twice. I understand there are liturgical abuses, but don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater and demand silence. Just saying…

Posted by Terah James on Thursday, Jan, 12, 2012 11:23 PM (EDT):

@ Dan -
The one and only Triune God wants us to worship Him in Spirit and in Truth, as Jesus told the Samaritan woman at the well, when she asked if everyone was to worship in Jerusalem, or not.

KEY is that we must worship Jesus, who is alive, having died for our sins, and risen from the dead. Buddha is in his grave. All other false ‘gods’ supposedly demand that people please them, and offer sacrifices to them, perpetually.

This is what makes Christianity different, and special. The Holy Spirit points us to Jesus, and Jesus, points to the Father, who answers prayer. It’s not that hard. But our souls depend on understanding it correctly.
Jesus is Lord. Remember when Jesus asked Peter, “Who do you say that I am?” We are all asked that question.

Sitting, standing, kneeling, in Latin, English or Chinese - God demands of us a humble & contrite heart. We need to know who we worship & why.

Posted by Michelle on Thursday, Jan, 12, 2012 7:10 PM (EDT):

Dan, with all due respect, this is not about obessing. This is about humble obedience. Lest we forget that even in the Bible, God enjoined strict mandates to be observed by Ancient Israel when worshipping Him. He spent no little time dictating to Moses just how He was to be worshipped. Form does matter. In fact, whenever Ancient Israel deviated from the form, there were rammifications.

When Jesus constituted the New Israel, the Church, through His supreme Sacrifice (which was prefigured in the sacrificial rites of Ancient Israel), he charged St. Peter and His successors with the authority to bind and loose. Down through the centuries, the Church, through the Petrine ministry, has refined her form of worship, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

This is not silliness. The first commandment is to love God. Loving God means offering Him fitting worship that is due His supreme Majesty.

Posted by DanM on Thursday, Jan, 12, 2012 6:30 PM (EDT):

Well, the “members” in this case are Priests and official Vatican documents, obsessing over putting a hand on a little child or making a sign of the cross over them since they can’t yet receive Communion, and obsessing over whether the words “Presider” or “Celebrant” is used, or how “horrible” the song “Gather Us in” is. I see this as just silly-ness, “-retentive” to the max. If these supposed examples of absolute truth are so obviously screwed up, I wonder what other “truths” are also. Seriously, I’m rethinking this faith I’ve grown up in…

to Dan M. Consider the TRUTH of the Catholic Faith, not the temperaments of the members.

Posted by DanM on Thursday, Jan, 12, 2012 1:22 PM (EDT):

Most “anal retentive” article and comments I’ve ever seen. I’ve been looking seriously at Buddhism, perhaps this is the time to jump…

Posted by Michelle on Thursday, Jan, 12, 2012 11:41 AM (EDT):

Mary, this is not legalism. The problem is that we have had such a casual, “anything goes” attitude about the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that we fail to see that there abuses have crept up. Furthermore, recall that Jesus wasted no time cleansing the Temple of abuse. Yes, it was liturgial abuse because the vendors and moneychangers set up shop in the Court of the Gentiles, which was sacred space. Furthermore, Jesus cared a lot about the rubrics laid out for the cultic sacrificial worship of Ancient Israel because His own Father dictated them to Moses. These rituals foreshadowed Jesus’ own sacrifice. When Jesus challenged the Pharisees, it was never about liturgical law (bear in mind that Pharisees had issues with the Temple priests). It was about the Phariees trying to apply priestly laws and practices to the people.

Tina, a blessing is not a substitute for receiving Christ in Holy Communion. Such blessings are an abuse, whether Mr. Weigel admits to this or not. The Congregation for Divine Worship laid out five observations as to why this should not be happening. While the letter that I quoted does not create new law, it does quote existing canonical and liturgical law. It is best to stay in one’s pew and make a spiritual communion than to do something that is contrary to the norms and rubrics.

Posted by irene on Thursday, Jan, 12, 2012 9:36 AM (EDT):

Heather, lighten up. Sounds like you need to take a break from singing for a while. Before you attack comments about the music, how about visiting some other parishes and see what is out there - not only piano bars, but dancing, clown masses, ‘feel good’ homilies, more clapping than in a theatre on Broadway - I could go on and on…...There is a quote that says, ‘Silence is the beginning of Wisdom’ - we need more silence, not more singing, or clapping, or dancing. I for one would like to enter into a Church and have some quiet time with God - the prayers would take on a whole new depth, trust me. The Mass is not about us, it is an hour where its about God.

Posted by mary on Thursday, Jan, 12, 2012 3:44 AM (EDT):

I am deeply saddened by the tone of this article and many of the comments here.I have been a devout Catholic all my life, love our faith, the Mass-both old and new translation. However,the prevailing attitude here seems to be one of legalism, faultfinding, ‘Catholic Police’ mentality. How chilling an attitude in the Body of Christ. One would think many here just go to Mass to see what’s wrong with their brothers and sisters in Christ. I would suggest we lift our hearts and minds to the Lord our God and perhaps see things through His eyes…I believe His eyes would be much kinder toward us ‘fragile jars of clay’, imperfect-yes, but still He chose to die for us sinners.

Posted by Michelle on Thursday, Jan, 12, 2012 12:41 AM (EDT):

@Lisa You say nothing to the children in the line. It’s not that you are being rude, but, as an EMHC, your sole duty is to assist the celebrant in the distribution of Holy Communion and nothing else. This is not being insensitive. The problem, as I see it, is that we have conditioned children (and adults who cannot receive Holy Communion) to have the mistaken notion that the blessing is some sort of consolation prize. This is the wrong approach to take. We form a line to receive Someone, in Holy Communion, Jesus, not something, a blessing which will be imparted to everyone at the proper time, towards the end of the Mass. There are those who will say that Jesus did not want children hindered in their approach to Him. However, this Gospel account did not occur within the context of Ancient Israel’s cultic form of sacrificial worship. We need to teach children to respect the rules and norms established by the Church.

Of course George Weigel is absolutely right about the abundance of bad liturgical habits. However, as others have pointed out the bigger problem is sadly too many clergy, let alone the majority of laity wouldn’t know a liturgical abuse if it poked them in the eye. The other problem of course is trying to put this genie back into the bottle. For any parent suffering through the superficial 1970’s style, experiential and social justice bent catechesis our children are subjected to at most every parish coast to coast, and you will know that the problem of formation is overwhelming – as well as the crux of the matter. Often after picking up my youngsters (of which I have four) from religious education, I want to dig my bean bag chair out of the attic, plug in my lava lamp and spread out on some shag carpet and sing songs from God Spell. The typical religious education faculty almost always consists of a DRE trained by errant instructors over weekend courses and who lead often well-meaning volunteer catechists into outright heresy without them even knowing they have left the magisterial teachings light years away. Raise a concern and you are labeled a radical nut-case, mention using the Catechism as a teaching tool and you are viewed slightly above Neanderthal. I detest so much the faux blessing that most ever Extra Ordinary (oxymoron) Eucharist Minister wants to perform that I used to cradle my one year old in my arms in such a way that it would be near impossible to trace a cross on her little forehead, but low and behold one day I was chased down the aisle by the EOEM whose eyes clearly conveyed panic in having missed his opportunity to “bless” someone. If it wasn’t all so serious it would be laughable. Nowadays if not EVERYBODY gets up to go and receive communion, people look at them strangely as if by deciding not to partake they have somehow caused a disruption. I’ll leave it there and purposely not mention the deacon homilies which always begin with, “My wife Cathy and I the other day….”

Posted by Hirduin on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 8:20 PM (EDT):

Good luck with this George. These sorts of articles are always good in bringing out the “Amen” and then some crowd as seen by all the comments, but in the long run, nothing changes and the abuses go on and on. This stuff always falls on deaf ears. Bishops, mainly don’t care and don’t do anything about it. I was at a morning Mass today and there was this extraordinary minister of holy communion wearing a rather low cut blouse standing up their just to Father’s right in front of all of us and God. She’s done this for at least two years now and no priest has ever said anything, not even this new young conservative and orthodox priest though he’s just a parish administrator while we wait for a new pastor. As for Sunday Mass,the guitars haven’t been put away nor has the awful music yet changed with this new edition of the Roman Missal. I am in the Grand Rapids, MI diocese.

Posted by kat on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 6:58 PM (EDT):

“Yes children, pray before you leave the pew and genuflect afterwards. I don’t care if half the congregation has left before the priest makes it down the aisle. Remember, Judas left early too.”

Going to the Novus Ordo Mass with my children is an exercise in utter frustration (we usually attend the TLM). Between the underwear showing outifts by the teenage girls (and boys who look like they just rolled out of bed), the whispering and giggling by the older folk, the holding hands at the Our Father, the ushers trying to push me into a Communion line staffed by a layman, and the insistence on saying “And also with you”, I almost think it might be better for my soul to pray at home rather than attend Mass. If I can manage to get myself and 6 children up, dressed, fed, and out the door to Mass on time then no one else really has an excuse.

Posted by katflower4 on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 6:51 PM (EDT):

I agree with ALWAYSHAPPY in addition to,in my parish, I dont see genuflection(sp?)and reverance before Mass begins as I saw growing up. People are chatting at their seats, and music is playing. I would like for it to be a “quiet” time of meditation and prayer. We are to be “heaven on earth”. Our parish has begun allowing us to greet one another at the beginning of Mass during our greeting. I’m glad to see the changes that have been made and am praying for the Catholics “who dont get it or understand” what Mass is all about. GOd Bless!!

Posted by Zeebus on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 6:47 PM (EDT):

Bravo! And use the darn kneelers if you have them! If you don’t have them, get them!

Mr. Weigel does get half of the point correct. In Ecclesia de Mysterio, the document specifically states that during the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass:

In eucharistic celebrations deacons and non-ordained members of the faithful may not pronounce prayers—e.g. especially the eucharistic prayer, with its concluding doxology—or any other parts of the liturgy reserved to the celebrant priest. Neither may deacons or non-ordained members of the faithful use gestures or actions which are proper to the same priest celebrant.
This includes the imparting of blessings, as these use both wording and gestures that are proper to the celebrant.

In November 2008, in response to a private query from two American lay men, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments addressed the issue of imparting blessings in lieu of distributing Holy Communion (Protocol No. 930/08/L). While the matter remains under the Congregations’ study, Msgr. Anthony Ward, writing on behalf of the curial body, made five observations as to why these blessings should not take place:

1. The liturgical blessing of the Holy Mass is properly given to each and to all at the conclusion of the Mass, just a few moments subsequent to the distribution of Holy Communion.

3. Furthermore, the laying on of a hand or hands — which has its own sacramental significance, inappropriate here — by those distributing Holy Communion, in substitution for its reception, is to be explicitly discouraged.

4. The Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio n. 84, “forbids any pastor, for whatever reason to pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry”. To be feared is that any form of blessing in substitution for communion would give the impression that the divorced and remarried have been returned, in some sense, to the status of Catholics in good standing.

5. In a similar way, for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin).
There is also another matter to consider. When the celebrant makes the proclamation: “Behold the Lamb of God…”, he is making the invitation for those who are properly disposed to approach and receive Our Lord in Holy Communion, not a blessing. This “blessing” appears nowhere in the GIRM nor in the rubric for the distribution of Holy Communion. Sacrosanctum Concilium (the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy), Redemptionis Sacramentum and the GIRM prohibit anyone, including the celebrant, from adding anything to the Mass. Some will argue that they have seen the Holy Father engage in this practice. Bear in mind, however, that the Pope is the supreme authority and can do as he sees fit because he is the visible head of the Church. Fr. Joe, at his parish, does not have the same authority, nor does Bishop Smith.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 6:03 PM (EDT):

Twice in the article, Mr. Weigel refers to the lay faithful who assist the celebrant in the distribution of Holy Communion, calling them either “Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist” or “Eucharistic Ministers.” According to Redemptionis Sacramentum, the term is “Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion”.

[156.] This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened.
This language actually came into usage back in 1997, in the interdiscastery document called Ecclesia de Mysterio, signed off on by the Congregation for the Clergy, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Here is what the document states:

The non-ordained faithful may be generically designated “extraordinary ministers” when deputed by competent authority to discharge, solely by way of supply, those offices mentioned in Canon 230, 3(56) and in Canons 943 and 1112. Naturally, the concrete term may be applied to those to whom functions are canonically entrusted e.g. catechists, acolytes, lectors etc. Temporary deputation for liturgical purposes—mentioned in Canon 230, 2—does not confer any special or permanent title on the non-ordained faithful.(57)

...1. The canonical discipline concerning extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion must be correctly applied so as to avoid generating confusion. The same discipline establishes that the ordinary minister of Holy Communion is the Bishop, the Priest and the the Deacon.(96) Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are those instituted as acolytes and the faithful so deputed in accordance with Canon 230, 3.(97)
Even the General Instruction of the Roman Missal makes repeated reference to the term Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion. Using the correct terminology is important because it removes any confusion that inaccurage wording can bring.

Posted by Maggie on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 5:56 PM (EDT):

I agree with Joe, none of these problems existed prior to making Mass seem like a Protestant service. Right on Cassandra, that handshaking is just too much especially when someone is sick.

Posted by Maryanne Linkes on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 5:22 PM (EDT):

Amen George. And thank you for this. As the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the re-presentation of the passion, suffering, and death of our Lord and Savior, we must make sure it is reverant and celebrated properly. We need to pray. But when we see an abuse, we must speak to our Pastor and/or the specific priest about it. May God give us the courage to do so and to do so in charity.

Presider and celebrant are synonyms for the person who offers the Mass. Thus, only a priest or bishop can be a presider or celebrant. Presider indicates that the priest takes the lead in offering the Mass. Celebrant connotes that the priest is the person who primarily celebrates the Mass. Of these two nouns, the use of presider for the person who offers the Mass better preserves or accentuates the truth of Article 11, that the congregation should take an active role in the liturgy, proper to their status as laity. To understand the importance of Article 11 read http://www.parishmissions.com/Mass_for_healing.html

Posted by Tina on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 3:05 PM (EDT):

By way of the responses, this is most certainly a subject that needs urgent attention. I am very glad the subject is being approached.
And I completely agree, the blessing should be given out by ordained men of God.
I say this because there are times when I do not make it to confession, and I do not wish to receive our Lord in a state of sin.
So I go up for a blessing.
However, many times the priest leaves the communion line in the centre of the Church, when the lay ministers of the Eucharist are done with the side lines, and lets them take over the giving out of the Body of Christ.
And he sits in his chair, waiting for the Communion procession to finish.
By the time I get to the front, there is no priest to bless me.
No offense to Eucharistic Ministers, but if I want a lay person to bless me, I would not go to Sunday service.
The main highlight of Mass is the Eucharist.
The next-best aspect if the blessing from an ordained Deacon or Priest.
If I cannot get either, why bother attending?
(I still go. Every Sunday. I just stay in the pew if I have not gone to confession. But let me tell you, in that case, it is not much different than attending protestant service).
I could bring up many more issues that spring forth from the lack of reverence at Mass - like answering a cell phone call (irks me so much) - but let’s leave that for another time.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this.

Posted by Cassandra on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 2:32 PM (EDT):

Another gripe of mine is that our priests have told the parishioners over and over again that the choir is not entertainment. But after every mass with out fail we have idiots applauding them. Grrrr!

Posted by Cassandra on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 2:31 PM (EDT):

I agree with you Paul about the hand holding and the open hands with out stretched arms posturing the priest. The only one allowed to have his arms out stretched with palms up is the priest. It drives me nuts when people do this and nothing is done to correct this. I cannot stand the stupid handshake of peace either. Time to cut that nonsense out too!!!

Posted by Joe on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 2:16 PM (EDT):

Just have the old form of the Latin Mass and you won’t have to contend with at least 3/4 of the antics that is addressed.

Posted by Paul on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 1:38 PM (EDT):

If you want a the blessing of the church then get in the communion line that has the ordained, a bishop, priest or decon at the end of the line. They are the only ones that can give the blessing of the church. The ministers are only giving a personal blessing.

Posted by Bill Henzey on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 12:55 PM (EDT):

I agree with your analysis of the reformed Novus ordo. Please dont go back to the one before it. This indeed follows the latin vulgate better.

Posted by Lisa J. on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 12:17 PM (EDT):

I just have a question, and this is a sincere inquiry, I’m not trying to be sarcastic. If the children are not to be blessed, then what does one say to them?? I just don’t see a problem at all with children (or for that matter, people who process for communion but are not able - for whatever reason - to receive that day) coming for a blessing. What do you suggest as an alternative?

Posted by Harold Crews on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 11:33 AM (EDT):

When it comes to Sunday Mass only your Sunday best or sack-cloth and ashes are appropriate. Your choice.

Posted by Paul on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 10:59 AM (EDT):

You missed the liturgical abuse of the faithful holding hands or being in the orens position during the “Our Father.” The Church never said to use these postures. These were added to the mass by personal initiative, and the Vatican has said that anything added to the Mass on personal initiative is to be repudiated. Mimicking the posture of the priest is against canon law. Holding hands came from the protestant heresy. If the GIRM doesn’t dictate ones posture then you are to look to the deacon. During the “Our Father” the deacon has his hands together, unless you are at a parish that has some new liturgical abuses.

Posted by Teresa on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 6:16 AM (EDT):

Nothing arrogant here at all! Tone nor content! The truth is the truth! And best proclaimed with great joy and dynamic! EXCELLENT job George! Keep up the great work!

Posted by CarpeNoctem on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 3:39 AM (EDT):

Fr. Richard, on “presiders” vs. “celebrants”: one can “preside” at Mass without being the “celebrant”. Bishops typically ‘preside’ when priests (as subordinate ministers) “celebrate” the Mass. In this case, the bishop does have a specific liturigcal function, typically to bless, but not to consecrate and not to ‘celebrate’. In such a case, you as the priest would not be the ‘presider’ when you go out to ‘celebrate’ Mass. Further, a ‘presiding’ bishop receives Holy Communion in this case in the same way as the rest of the faithful, with his mind and attention raised to the sacred mysteries, through the faithful ‘celebration’ of the mysteries mentioned in CSL #11. In the more common case where the two functions are collapsed on each other, to prefer the title “presider” as the “celebrant” of Mass is like insisting on using the title “girlfriend” when referring to one’s “wife”. Yes, they can and typically do refer to the same person, but sometimes, embarassingly not. It is placing the administrative function and identity of “pre-sidere” (the one ‘sitting in front of’) over and above the sacramental reality of being personally invested in the solemn re-presentation of Calvary through the joyful abandonment of the priest into the mystery, which is being stylized by the muti-valent verb “celebrate”... to solemnize, to ratify, to honor, to proclaim. I might even propose that “preside” limits one’s attention and awareness to events taking place in time and space, whereas “celebrate” leads us outside of ourselves and into the action of Christ—which I think is the insistence of CSL #11. There is a place for “presiders” in liturgical prayer outside Mass, but the identity and function of the leader of prayer is very different there than in the sacramental reality presented in Mass.

Please, I need response. I hear they say, we change word of Mass prayer. They say it is more close to Latin. Sometimes yes. But, then the Bible word go far way from Latin. I hear word from Bible in English. And, these word are not so good. These word are not from Latin word. Here I give example. Early in Holy Mass we said, “...peace to men of goodwill.” Now the word we say, “...peace to people of good will.” This is not the Bible. Men means all people. We are human. The woman, she come from man. Man was first. He is glory of God. But man is glory of woman. This is example from Bible. There many more words in Bible in English, it not so good hearing. Somebody, she make mistake. Bible is good, the word is good. But, I hear they say, “we want to be close to the Latin in the Mass.” But, how can she be close to Latin in Holy Mass if she no get good Latin from Bible? I sorry for bad English. Thats all. Except I glad you play soccer in America. Thank you.

Posted by Joseph on Wednesday, Jan, 11, 2012 12:37 AM (EDT):

How about some prayerful silence during Communion? I get annoyed when I’m asked to sing a hymn while processing up the aisle to receive Our Lord as well as afterward. How about some silence to ponder what we really are receiving and to thank God afterward? Every moment of the Mass doesn’t need to be filled with singing, does it?

Please, I needs liturgista americana. I hear they say, we change word of Mass prayer. They say it is more close to Latin word. Sometimes yes. But, then the Bible words go far way from Latin. I hear word from Bible in English. And, these word are not so good. Eh. These word are not from Latin word. I think they do communist play. They just add new meaning to word. Then the old word mean something new. They use language for change the culture. Culture make language. It backward. You have so much fear in America. So much wanting for to control. Here I give example. Early in Holy Mass we use say sometime, “...peace to men of goodwill.” Now the word we say, “...peace to people of good will.” This is not the Bible. Men means all people. We are human. The woman, she come from man. Man was first. He is the glory of God. But man is the glory of woman. This is example. It is in Bible. There many more words in Bible in English, it not so good hearing. I think it confuse people. And somebody made a bad with the new Mass. It is not a new Holy Mass. It same Mass. Somebody, she make mistake. Bible is good, the word is good. But, I hear they say, “we want to be close to the Latin in the Mass.” But, how can she be close to Latin in Holy Mass if she no get good Latin from Bible? I sorry for bad English. Thats all. Except I glad you play soccer in America. Thank you.

Posted by Brenda Forester on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 11:46 PM (EDT):

I am sad to see you printed Fr. Dino Vanin’s remarks relavant to ” Altar Rails Returning”. This priest is sending confusion to the people who out of adoration and in humility kneel befor God himself to receive His Body and Blood. All Communicants receive The Eucharist on their knees during the Latin Mass so why should our reception anytime be different. No pastor should discourage parishoners from making a sincere sign of reverence while receiving holy Communion, in fact he should be most delighted with this practice. St Martin de Porres Catholic Church in Jensen Beach FL. distributes Communion with a kneeler next to the priests for that very reason. People do not kneel beacause our pastors have been silent in the teaching of this most holy and sacred mystery. Just as each apostle is unique in his character and his obedience, Jesus speaks to his faithful in intimate ways asking for paticular forms of obedience. Kneeling is how the faithful receive holy Communion from the Pope, why not every priest?
I also travel to Italy and many do kneel.
With utmost respect,
Brenda Forester

Posted by Karen Redenbaugh on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 11:37 PM (EDT):

Good article. Thank you for writing it. However:

I believe that the correct term is Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion and not Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist.

I agree the Priest should follow the Mass to the T,I belong to a parish in Bedford Tx St.Michael you think you are in a piano/cigar bar the music is horrid they never use the organ the Priest that just left changed words in the Mass all the time and if you said anything to him he would say go to another parish,He would be talken to people while walken down the isle to the alter,between the horrible music and the changed words in the Liturgy I sometime wonder if its Catholic or not!!

Posted by Peter on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 9:20 PM (EDT):

I am especially guilty of the after-Mass conversation, and some other equally wrong, though less noticeable (except to God) things.
Great article, Mr. Weigel. Thank you.

Posted by John Lilburne on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 9:05 PM (EDT):

Rather than using the term “Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist” it should be “Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion”. The 2004 Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum has:
“[156.] This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened.” (The full document is at http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html ).

The Eucharistic Prayer is said by the Eucharistic minister.

Posted by Ingrid on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 8:18 PM (EDT):

Good article. I know I’m guilty of some of the habits mentioned here-especially after Mass.

Another point that should be addressed is tardiness. Not being late for the start of Mass and not leaving right after Communion as I observe many do. Mass etiquette is a title of a book, bearing an imprimatur that I would love to see. Mr. Weigel are you up to writing one?

Posted by Mike on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 7:16 PM (EDT):

It’s not that I disagree with most of what is written here- in fact, I think it is good to dress appropriately at Church and to remember that we are in the Divine Presence and should act with proper decorum. I agree that priests should follow the Missal to a “T”. I guess what bothers me is the tone in which you assert all this. We are losing parishioners at such a rapid pace in this country, especially young people. If we don’t welcome them or if we show them the attitude which appears to be coming across in this article will they ever come back to teh Catholic Church? Now, I’m not saying we turn the Mass into a Pentocostal event, but perhaps one Mass can be more focused on young people. Is it not better for them to hear the Word of God and participate in the Holy Eucharist? If this means, we have some music that is not necessarily old school or heaven forbid, “Gather us In” what is the harm? Can we find a balance? But lets hope they are not “welcomed home” as the recent commercials beckon with an attitude like the one presented herein.

The constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Article 11, teaches that the effects of the Mass cannot be received by mere passive presence. “But in order that the liturgy may be able to produce its full effects, it is necessary that the faithful come to it with proper dispositions, that their minds be attuned to their voices, and that they cooperate with heavenly grace, lest they receive it in vain. Pastors of souls must, therefore, realize that when the liturgy is celebrated, something more is required than the laws governing valid and lawful celebration. It is their duty also to ensure that the faithful take part fully aware of what they are doing, actively engaged in the rite and enriched by it.”

1.When I am called not the celebrant but rather the presider, I better communicate the above.

2.Singing all the verses of the opening song is most important for the same reason. The closing song does not have that function. The assembly has already been dismissed, the Mass is over. How long it takes for the presider to exist the church after Mass is over is what determines how many verses of the resessional hymn are sung.

3.The full and active participation of those who do not receive Holy Communion at Mass is just as important as those who do. If an extraordinary minster blesses those not receiving helps with this, then any regulation against their blessing non-communicants is trumped by the above.

4. The Mass is ended when the deacon declares it to be and the presider has left the church. After that the choir should cease singing and allow for strong, enthusiastic interaction by the congregation as they exit the church – which is a sure sign the above has been fulfilled.

I do not believe any of Mr. Wiegel’s other thoughts are in conflict with Article 11. and thus can be well taken.

Posted by Cheryl on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 6:21 PM (EDT):

Choirs are nice to hear from a loft. It’s when there are one or two singers up front on the altar with guitars and leading the congregation that causes more a performance effect. The songs are poor quality often times as well. The old hymns were beautiful and many young people have never heard them. The singing of those hymns from the choir loft was like of angels. It was also more background music than blaring at you up front. I would love to have silence while going up to receive Communion but the singing goes on right up to when the Priest is ready to give the final Blessing. This singing causes agitation and distraction, especially for those who want to spend intimate time quietly with Jesus. Singing has been given far more importance than the Eucharist as though we didn’t have the Eucharist and it needs to compensate. I also don’t believe in making our Church to be more in touch with modern times. The changes that have happened over the years have been to more human likings than Godly ones. And when someone says Jesus wouldn’t mind if we talk, etc., it is better to think that He does mind, rather than to carry on talking, because that is what YOU want to do. Ask if it truly is reverence to do so.

Posted by mary on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 4:22 PM (EDT):

I visited some churches in America and found that people turn the inside of the church almost into a market place after Mass. I must say here in Nairobi Kenya we still maintain silence in our churches at all times! Thank you for your wonderful piece and hope we can bring sanctity back to our churches.

Posted by Juan Oskar on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 3:53 PM (EDT):

Whose idea was it anyway to start these bad Liturgical Habits? How do we know we’re not starting another group of bad Liturgical Habits? What does the Church know now that they didn’t know 40 years ago but knew before Vatican II? People are confused!

Posted by Heather on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 3:46 PM (EDT):

@ Defender: Do you really think we are there to entertain YOU??? Do you think we spend two extra hours a week in choir rehearsal to hear our heads rattle? We do it because it is the talent the Lord has blessed us with and has asked us to use to GLORIFY HIM!!! As to the, “choosing sung Mass settings that only the choir have access to—we too are learning the new words of translation, then you throw a musical setting that goes off on some tangent repeating parts of the new verbage we are trying to learn .. just to fill a musical arrangement. The new Gloria settings are amongst the worst offenders in this regard.”

In our Diocese, the BISHOP dictated which Mass setting would be used: “Mass of St. Francis Cabrini”. (Remember obedience?) Do you think we LIKE having no one sing the Gloria with us???? It is a long Gloria…even reading it takes over one and a half minutes at a nice clip. So it has to be sung. Unless you read music - and not many people do… the cost to print the entire Mass setting is exhorbitant. We did it, at our choir director’s personal expense. The result? After the first Mass, people took them home instead of leaving them for others. The next week…the same thing, even admitting they had left their other copies at home. Instead of complaining, how about joining the choir, volunteering to be a cantor (‘cause, trust me, we would like a chance to lose ourselves in the Mass as well, instead of having to “be on point” all the time.). Then you can see what it is like to be standing up there, singing your heart out for Jesus, begging people to sing with you to HIS glory, and get back bored, yawining, vaucous stares, or people daydreaming at the ceiling of the church. I kinda get tired of people slamming the music. It doesn’t happen automatically, we have to work WEEKS on many of the classical pieces we are given, which are chosen to support the scriptures of the day. Then, just when you think you have done a good job for the Lord, someone comes up and complains about the tempo - too fast/slow, or that the organ is too loud/soft, or they want/don’t want drums, or are, for some other reason totally not your fault, compeletly unhappy and just feel the need to moan and complain about something so they can feel self-righteous. (Piano Bar???? Seriously???) Very Tiresome.

Posted by steph on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 3:42 PM (EDT):

Reverence is the word that comes to mind. So many distractions we almost forget reverence for the Awesome and Almighty God.

Posted by Frank on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 2:09 PM (EDT):

I think your ideas have more to do with your “issues” than with Jesus. Do you really think Jesus is upset when a eucharistic minister blesses or traces the sign of the cross on someone’s forhead who does not receive eucharist? The hymns you mentioned (very telling) do not speak the language of today….they were good in their day…..but they are not infallible. Hymns need to be singable with words that speak to today’s people. And “narthex” - PALEEZE, only architects and guys in birettas use that kind of language. All your “recommendations” remind me of the scriptures that warns about “having the form of religion but denying its power.”

Posted by Amy on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 1:38 PM (EDT):

Excellent. Not by any means an inclusive list of abuses that need to cease, but a good start.

@Monica: Do not give up hope. I live in a liberal diocese with rampant liturgical abuses. Going to Mass became a heartache. Then the token orthodox priest assigned to our parish and things are looking up! PRAY FOR OUR PRIESTS!

Posted by Barbara on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 1:31 PM (EDT):

How grateful I am for the gift of this article. There really are Catholics who appreciate reverence for the sacred. I wholeheartedly agree with every point made and add this thought..What of the silence and respect upon entering church for those who prefer to prepare for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass by prayer and reflection, rather then believing one has mistakenly arrived at a sports stadium? Sadly many pastors and priests encourage socializing past the “gathering space” and often are the loudest of the talkers.I’m all for sharing with others..but not in this holy space.

Posted by Jan Nathan on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 1:30 PM (EDT):

Those who complain about the overuse of extraordinary ministers of communion are not in parishes with one or two priests, one deacon and a weekend attendance of over 4000 at five masses. . . . .

Posted by Monica on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 12:19 PM (EDT):

I agree with you, but at our parish I have no hope of any of this registering with anyone who will be moved to make changes. Our kind, friendly pastor is too kind and friendly to “step on any toes” with the ladies that run things and he will not do anything different than what’s been done since he arrived.

Posted by Aunt Raven on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 12:12 PM (EDT):

I always appreciate if the priest will tell us beforehand which preface / eucharistic prayer he is going to use, and whether or not it is even in my missal so that I do not distract and annoy myself and others turning pages back and forth in frustration.

But may I suggest that if one is really after liturgial intergrity with regards to music, we must return to singing the Proper of the Mass-the Entrance, Offertory and Communion Antiphons with their Psalmody?

Posted by AlwaysHappy on Tuesday, Jan, 10, 2012 8:29 AM (EDT):

I agree completely with the author’s comments. Trouble is, too many Catholic know or understand little about what the Mass is all about. And too many of our children are all but toally ignorant. Coming to Mass has become simply a ‘convenience.’ The Sunday obligation has all but gonme out the window! In too many churches applause follows every Mass. Since when and why? The Mass should never be seen as ‘entertainment’! The new Roman Missal leave much to be desired. In short, we don’t talk like that! I find the prayers bulky, cold, and unappealing! They are hard to listen to and follow. Attire at Mass reflects our society’s casualness. In that regard, some Protestant churches put us to shame!

Posted by Defender on Monday, Jan, 9, 2012 10:43 PM (EDT):

And how about telling music directors to stop making the Mass into a liturgical equivalent of being entertained in a piano bar.

Stop choosing hymns that aren’t found in the hymnals. We aren’t there to be entertained by the choir or your playing—magnificent as it may be—we are there to participate and sing along.

And while we’re at it ... Stop choosing sung Mass settings that only the choir have access to—we too are learning the new words of translation, then you throw a musical setting that goes off on some tangent repeating parts of the new verbage we are trying to learn .. just to fill a musical arrangement. The new Gloria settings are amongst the worst offenders in this regard.

And finally—- we do like to sing the the responsorial psalm—but gee, if you choose something that isn’t in out missals or dusty old hymnals—

Maybe that’s why I see so many people sitting at Mass staring into space while the choir and music director entertains them.

Posted by Dan Kearns on Monday, Jan, 9, 2012 9:31 PM (EDT):

Good ideas. But perhaps lost on many because of an arrogance of tone, alas.

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won't publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.